TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsLawmakers revisit Constitutional Court Law after election ruling
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Constitutional Court Chief Justice Suhartoyo (right) talks with Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra (left) on June 23, 2025, during a judicial review petition hearing against the Indonesian Military (TNI) Law at the Constitutional Court in Jakarta. Saldi asked representatives from the government and House of Representatives why the law revision extended beyond the court's order revising military officers' retirement age. (Antara/Bayu Pratama S)
T
alks to revise the Constitutional Court Law have resurfaced after lawmakers and major political parties in the House of Representatives voiced objection to the Court’s recent decision to separate national and local elections, accusing it of overstepping its constitutional authority.
The renewed discussions follow a Constitutional Court ruling issued last month, which mandates that starting in 2029, national and regional elections will be held between two and two-and-a-half years apart, effectively ending the simultaneous “five-ballot elections” implemented in 2014 and 2019.
The Court’s decision has triggered pushback from political parties in the House, raising concerns that they may attempt to undermine the ruling, potentially through a revision of the Constitutional Court Law that critics warn could erode judicial independence.
Muhammad Khozin, a politician from the National Awakening Party (PKB) and a member of House Commission II overseeing home affairs, said the Court had overstepped its role by issuing what he considers a legislative decision. He argued that revising the Constitutional Court Law is necessary to clarify the limits of its authority.
“In our constitution, it is the House and the government that make laws. The Constitutional Court’s role is to safeguard the constitution, not to act like a legislator,” Khozin said in a press release. “If the Court is now seen as having the power to create laws, then it might as well be officially legitimized [in the law].”
Read also: Lawmakers signal resistance against Constitutional Court’s split-election ruling
The proposed amendment has sparked sharp criticism from constitutional law experts and pro-democracy advocates who accuse lawmakers of trying to push it through with minimal public consultation and without adequate scrutiny–an effort, they say, aimed at tightening political control over the judiciary.
